[Released] Develop a "basic backup schedule" mode for when Tado outage or loss of internet

@Jurian Thank you for taking the time to answer, even if it was a long time coming (which is aimed at Tado not at you personally).

Unfortunately I do think it's a bit of a non-answer to essentially say "it's designed this way, we don't plan to change it". I certainly disagree with your statement that an internet outage is "very rare" - for many in rural locations in particular, it can be quite common. That is the reason this feature is so highly requested, so I think it's wrong to just assume your customers are wrong.

Whilst I am not privy to Tado's specific architecture, I do not accept that it is as complicated as you are making out. I think many of us commenting on here are involved in related industries, I'm CTO at a tech firm myself, so let's not pretend this is a mammoth effort with no workable solutions. I also work with IoT devices a lot so I know that things aren't always as straight forward when you're working within these limitations.

But as stated in previous posts here, it seems logical to me that a local backup schedule would be pushed from the Bridge via the Smart Thermostats anyway, since you want the TRVs to run in the lowest power state possible, so new TRVs should not be necessary which is the main expense in the vast majority of situations.

If it is genuinely the case that the Tado team cannot work on this as well as fairly simple features like Child Lock and Global ON/OFF, then that is quite revealing as the development team must be one or two people maximum.

@Jurian Thank you for the reply although I really don't know why it has taken Tado 2 years to give an answer. It would of saved people a lot of frustration!

I

@Jurian great answers. I guess most people are so worked up about this because there was no response for a long time.

I don't want to argue tados priorities. I know its always about tradeoffs. Improving connection and/or providing repeaters and the like would be awesome. And stable internet must be a given.

Now, guess what. I did restart my bridge yesterday and it does connect to the radiator two stories down, form my office to the basement (which is half underground)!!! That is fan-freaking-tastic... I could not get a Zigbee mesh to get that far.

So long that this is working I'll be happy with the scheduling. I will also try for one room to do the scheduling via HK only to see what I prefer.

Anyhow, you proved great communication skills on this thread - that's the way to keep the users engaged even though opinions are like a...h... - you get it ;-)

Have a good day

@Jurian Do you have any data to back this up? Or is it just an assumption? The comments on this thread would suggest that this is maybe not the case.

Why not both? Besides, the difference is that stability between the bridge and Tado devices can be improved by taking practical steps within the building. For many, it is not possible to move to a more reliable internet connection.

And where is this advertised, exactly? I see nothing that suggests that on any of these pages, let alone states it explicitly:

• https://www.tado.com/gb-en/
• https://www.tado.com/gb-en/tado-system-overview
• https://www.tado.com/gb-en/smart-radiator-thermostat-overview

I have a stable internet connection myself, but I've chosen other solutions for two family members' homes because they live in areas without stable connections.

@Jurian I would also like to thank you for reconnecting with us users here. As a software engineer for over 40 years and a product manager for the past 10 years I can say for sure that the best way to keep customers engaged and 'positive' is to engage in a constructive dialogue with them and, as far as is reasonable, share product plans, development priorities etc. as you have now started doing. Even if the answers you give are not always what everyone wants to hear, it is much better than no communication and at least we then have an understanding of the thinking within Tado.

As someone who has in the past suffered somewhat from connectivity reliability issues, both within my home amongst my Tado devices and for the cloud service (despite my internet connection being extremely stable) I can say that recently (some months now) I have not had any such problems. Perhaps some of the work you mention regarding these areas has already been rolled out?

I am also a big HomeKit user but I can say that I do not generally use HomeKit at all for my Tado devices. Why? Because the Tado app and functionality is far richer and more powerful than what is available via HomeKit. In particular, scheduling via HomeKit is extremely primitive. However I do think that having HomeKit integration is vital and it can be a useful fallback in the event of a prolonged Internet (or cloud service) outage.

So thank you again and please keep up the good work both in development and communication.

Living in a rural area where my ADSL goes down frequently, and my internet bridge goes down even more often after purchasing it 4 moths ago... this is bad news for me.

Even tado email support is non helpful, Santana never gives a proper answer and Laura just told me that if I don't have administrator access to my ISP provided ADSL router, my problems wont go away. I wish that was stated on the website before buying the kit.

So, no planned feature to fix the dumb smart schedule, 1 because it's too complicated for upcoming tado v4, and because other language forums don't ask for it. Guess what, english is not my first language but I posted here because it's the most active forum.

You don't even need Internet instability for this to be a huge issue. Once again this week we woke up to a cold house. There is zero indication that we lost Internet, so I'm left wondering whether the Tado kit just isn't fit for purpose, or the Tado service perhaps went down? Either way, why does it fail to gracefully recover? Why does it work for many weeks, then spectacularly fail?

I'm not convinced the issues I'm seeing are Internet access failure. We have a fast Virgin Media connection that rarely fails, but if it does, everything else in the house recovers, so there is no excuse for Tado kit not to. I can't justify the costs to switch out the modem for one that does failover, plus an additional Internet service when it's simply not clear that this will resolve the issue. If the Tado system loses connection to the servers, be that through loss of Internet, or as it seems here for other reasons, it needs to have a robust coping mechanism in place which is just doesn't seem to have at the moment.

To follow up on @Jurian's post on Feb 11th replying to @johnbur, while the Tado bridge may well have the HomeKit chip in it, this doesn't stop non-Apple devices controlling it via HomeKit. As @Qwerty2k has mentioned, Home Assistant can connect locally to the bridge via HomeKit, as can any Python script using the homekit_python module.

Home Assistant can be installed on a Raspberry Pi and made to control Tado locally. What would be nice to see is that component developed to allow Home Assistant to let Tado function normally, but step in when internet is disconnected and/or it discovers that Tado has missed a scheduled change.

The Android/iOS app (or a web browser/PC) is used to create Smart Programs (i.e. on/off scheduling of Hot Water and temperature scheduling for heating) and requires internet access before it will work. I understand (not, yet, from experience) that if the internet connection to the Internet Bridge is lost, all of this will cease to work and the system will simply continue in whatever state it was in at the moment the connection dropped.

It seems to me that this total reliance on the Internet (and Tado's server) isn't necessary; indeed the only routine function that by its nature is web dependent is remote control away from the home. Since all the equipment is co-located inside the premises at other times, it seems to me that all communication could and should be kept local.

My Android device connects to my router by WiFi; my PC connects to my router by WiFi; the Internet Bridge is hard wired to an ethernet port on the same router and has an IP address all its own.

I propose therefore either

1: (Preferred) That an Android or iOS device (or a PC) connected to the same router (LAN) as the Internet Bridge can communicate directly with the Bridge and thereby the system, so as to maintain control over it without needing an active web connection, and transmits Smart Program timers to the devices as required or

2: (Less ideal) That an add-on device is developed which pairs with the Bridge (just as Thermostats and Receivers do) or connects to the router (WiFi preferably) and can similarly hold a Smart Program and communicate timers to the devices without the need for an internet connection.

3: The Internet Bridge itself is redeveloped such that it can retain Smart Programs and continue to operate the system as long as it has power (only). And the mobile app (or an add-on programmer device; or a PC conected to the Bridge's IP via the LAN) can update these settings, again, locally.

Parallel reference for comparison: my PC can communicate directly with my set top box via my home network and transfer contents to and from the onboard hard drive; no internet needed; just the local network.

...and, as if to prove my (and others') point, this morning I woke to an unheated house and the app showing no remote access. Restarted the router and up it all came. Single point of failure.

Maybe I'll put the router on a power timeswitch that restarts it daily in the small hours. But again - why?

and in the next refresh please add thread support

I have already done so